Please do a forum search. There are several threads discussing those lenses. Like this one for example:
http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=168

Hi everyone;

This is my first post on the forums after reading for probably a year or longer. About a year ago I got my first DSLR, a D5000 with kit lenses: 18-105VR and 70-300VR. I love the 18-105VR for a walkaround lens, I love the 70-300VR for birding and wildlife. I also bought the 35mm 1.8 for my new baby girl, and got some beautiful pics with lovely bokeh melting out the background. I do take about 3-4 trips a year to nice locations around North America for other types of shooting, been to the Rockies, New Mexico, Florida, and around Ontario (where I live) shooting all sorts of wildlife, and using my 18mm for landscapes. I will be probably going to Costa Rica for work at least a few times a year starting in 2 months. I also read, alot. I've read almost every part of both Thom Hogan's and Ken Rockwell's sites, and consider myself a quickly learning Amateur. I have a website, and am building up a portfolio of some of my work, if anyone's interested I'll post some samples of what I've been able to accomplish so far. My shot discipline has come a long way, I use a monopod for birding half the time, and hand-held the other half. I take at least a few lunchtimes a week to drive around the outskirts of the city looking for hawks, and have some good pictures to show for it.

To the point: I use the 70-300VR probably 80% of my shooting, mostly for birding, but do other wildlife too, especially when I start visiting Costa Rica.

I shoot probably 85% of my shots on the 70-300VR at 300mm. I'm really starting to feel the limitations of Autofocus speed and the 'softness' of the lens at 300mm. I want to upgrade. My question is, how does this lens compare to the 80-400 or a 70-200 f2.8 w/TC 2.0 III?

The 70-300mm is soft at the long end, and a little slow on the Autofocus for me.
The 80-400mm looks like the same thing with longer reach, however, I've read that the autofocus is slow. I would also have to upgrade to the D7000 for this lens, as the D5000 will only focus with AF-S lenses.
The 70-200mm looks like a huge upgrade, but costs at least twice as much as the 80-400mm once you add the TC. I'm also worried about getting this combo, but finding the loss of light with the TC to be a big factor in autofocus speed, what will it be like compared to the other two lenses?

Can anyone give me experience with these three lenses? I'm debating the upgrade I would get out of an 80-400mm, and cringing at the cost of the 70-200mm w/TC. I love birding, but am really feeling the limitations of the 300mm with softness.

I feel some of my limitations might come from the D5000, but the D7000 is not that much of an upgrade, and costs over twice as much.

And yes, I believe I've read many of the posts on the forums about these lenses individually, but I'd really like experiential comparisons if anyone has them. Opinions with detail would be welcome too ;)

longi - as Niko wrote do a forum search, although in a short 55-200 is a better option if You can't afford 70-300vr, 70-300g is a crappy lens

Please do a forum search as these lenses have been talked about numerous times.

Hi, guys.

Could you please give me some advices as I am choosing these two lenses for my D3000:

AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G, and
AF Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G

I like shooting portraiture, natures and wildlife.

Thanksssss...:-)

shivaswrath said:
I'm not sure they'll produce one man - I mean, the 24 2.8 is cheap and wide, for $250 used?

Yeah, that's still not wide enough for me. :D

shivaswrath said:
I'm not sure they'll produce one man - I mean, the 24 2.8 is cheap and wide, for $250 used?

Since when was 24mm on a crop camera considered wide? 36mm equivalent is more like normal than wide.

I'm not sure they'll produce one man - I mean, the 24 2.8 is cheap and wide, for $250 used?

shivaswrath said:
and remember on a DX body - you're shooting at effectively 100mm.

get the 35 1.8 DX if you need something sharp and "wider". . .or best bet, though more expensive, is the 18-105.

I still am waiting for a cheap wide DX prime, maybe 18mm or so.

and remember on a DX body - you're shooting at effectively 100mm.

get the 35 1.8 DX if you need something sharp and "wider". . .or best bet, though more expensive, is the 18-105.

70mm is not nearly wide enough. At 70mm, you'll be struggling to get any pictures indoors, and you won't be able to get many good ones outdoors either (landscape ones, that is).

If you are getting a D90/D7000 kit then just use the 18-105. If you are not getting the kit...Just get it.

Having 70 as your widest setting is very limiting. 18mm-35mm is about f/3.5-f/4 So you are losing 2 stops, not the worst thing.

Yeah, it's going to be a tight group. Again, it depends. I've only shot with two lenses, so yeah, I don't have much experience.

Mostly groups of 2 or 3 people, some individuals. From your experience it seems this is going to be a tight fit. If it comes to that, I can always take waist up pictures.

Nikoner said:
Let me ask you this, if I am in a 25 x 20 foot room with say 10 people. Would I be able to take decent shots of people? I know I will have to work harder moving around, but will I be able to get pictures of average sized people (say 5.8 to 6 foot)?

Will you be taking individual shots or group shots? It's very difficult for me to be at a reasonable distance with the 35mm 1.8 as it is, the 85mm has got to be much tighter.

Let me ask you this, if I am in a 25 x 20 foot room with say 10 people. Would I be able to take decent shots of people? I know I will have to work harder moving around, but will I be able to get pictures of average sized people (say 5.8 to 6 foot)?

You can use the lens however you see fit. There are no limits to what you can to do with the lens.

After a lot of review, research, and advice here; I have decided I need a Nikon 85mm 1.8D for my indoor sports shooting needs (Basketball, Volleyball, and Swimming & Diving). I will buy it along-with a D90+70-300vr kit, either before the current rebates end or wait till July.

I was wondering if I can get away with using the 85mm for day to day casual shooting as well, or should I look into buying cheapest available wide prime?

rusty - I never had this problem with my d90

Thanks Niko that explains it. Manager did say it was industry wide and they had similar stocking issues with Canon and Sony. I hope the prices come down once all those ships enter harbor.

Rusty: I agree with you, based on what I have read about D300(s). However, I feel that D300(s) would be a too much of a camera for me personally. I mean P6000 is touted as a bridge camera (and it is, I learned a lot from it) but it’s not gonna catapult me in a different league. If you don’t mind me asking: what sports do you generally shoot, and which lens do you use for it? Thanks.

I feel, that for sports, the higher frame rate of the D300s is a huge advantage, there hasn't been one mention of it in this thread.

When I shoot with my D90, I often just "miss" the action, maybe my intuition is faulty, maybe it gets "in between the (drops) frames."

With the D300s I have more throw-aways, but also more keepers.

Nikoner, read this post for the probable explanation.

http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1856#post-31191

Though it might also be that a new model is coming soon too.

I was at Penn Camera - Baltimore area today, and they did not have a single D90 body in stock. Neither did they have any D90 kit except for one kit with 18-105 lens.

The manager told me they were in short supply and Nikon was unusually slow with restocking dealers. However, he denied that Nikon may simply be trying to clear inventory before the replacement hits the market.

He substantiated his argument with telling me they had ordered 100 units of D90 but the delivery was delayed due to slow market. I don’t know what to make of it.

I think the D90 is at a slammingly amazing price right now. . .at it's peak, it was floating body only at $900. . .I just actually sold my D200 to "upgrade" to the D90 . . .

For imaging reasons ALONE, it has been a pleasure. . .sure the metering is "okay" sometimes, but nothing a little spot metering can't handle. . .

Despite knowing it was getting discontinued this year, it's a gem of a body, has great features the D300 is lacking (some of the in camera processing stuff, for instance), and I would argue it isn't worth paying more than the current $750-800 on the 12mpx DX sensor when the D400 will be out in the next 12 months. . .

That was pretty much why I decided to just suck it up, get a great body at a steal of a price, and relegate it to a vacation/back up body when next sensor set is out (whatever it'll be). . .

Welcome to the forum, Unitymind. I agree with what you said and I'm in the same situation. The D90 is a great value.